搜索
1ResearchonCivilLiabilityofRepresentationFictitiouslyinSecurityLaw234AbstractCivilliabilitysystemofrepresentationfictitiouslyinsecuritylawisaweaklinkinourChinassecuritieslegislation.Moreover,iturgentlyneedsathoroughtheoreticalresearch.Theauthorinspectsthetheoriesandconcreteevidencesofdifferent5countriessecuritieslaws,studiesentitylawandprocedurelawofcivilliabilityofrepresentationfictitiouslyinsecuritylawwiththecluessuchaswhoshouldcompensate,howtocompensateandhowmuchoneshouldcompensate,andputforwardasuggestiontoperfectourChinascivilliabilitysystemofrepresentationfictitiouslyinsecuritylawandprotectinvestorsinterests.Thethesiscanbedividedintosixchapters.ChapterIsummarize.Thethesisintroduceslaw,valueandfunctionaboutrepresentationfictitiouslyinsecuritylawandrestrictsnatureofresponsibility.Insecuritieslegislationofdifferentcountriesintheworld,restraintofrepresentationfictitiouslyinsecuritylawisalwaystheemphasisofsecuritieslawandthecareofsecuritiesgovernance.Thelawofsecuritiesfalsestatementscanpunishillegalactionseffectivelyandensureinvestorslegalinterestsbyrelyingonperfectlawliabilityandsettingupandperfectingthecivilliabilitysystemofsecuritiesfalsestatementsgradually.Accordingtothedifferentsubjectsandperiods,thepublishersandsponsorsfalserepresentationsconstituteliabilityforfaultintheprimarymarketandliabilityfortortinthesecondarymarket.Therestsubjectsfalseactionsconstitutesponsorliabilitythatbelongstosupplementary.ChapterIIrestrictsactionsoffalsestatementsandanalyzes6differentformsofcivilliabilityofactionsoffalsestatements.Inthesecuritymarket,theactionthatviolateliabilityofrevealinginformationisfalsestatements.Theformsaredividedintofour:false,omit,misleadandfalseforecast.Injudgingactionsoffalsestatements,definitionimportantstandardofinformationisadifficultprobleminlegislationandpractice.Onprinciple,everypieceofinformationthathasimportanteffectoninvestors’decisionshouldberevealed.Therefore,securitylawsinmanycountrieshavedraftednormalformsaboutpapersofinformationrevealing,inordertonormalizeactionsofinformationrevealing.ChapterIIIanalyzesthecivilliabilitysystemofsecuritiesfalsestatementssubjects,basingontheinspectionofsecuritieslegislationindifferentcounties.InourChina’ssecuritieslaw,subjectsthatundertakecivilliabilitysystemofsecuritiesfalsestatementsincludepublisherandsponsor;boardandmanger;securitiesspecializedserviceorganizationandspecializedstaff.Atfirst,thefourthchaptermainlydiscusstheliabilityprinciplesfordifferentsubjectsoffalsestatementaction.Inthesecuritymarket,thepublisher(sponsor)isthedirectpersonofsecurityinformation,theuserandbeneficiaryofraisingafund,whoassumefullliabilityforthepublicinformationwithtruecompleteandaccurate.Theyalsoshouldundertakeno7mistakingliability,onlybythecausalitybetweentheactionsofputtingtotheproofandresultofdamages,cantheyhavedissolutionofliability.Iftheyhavemistakecannotbethecondition;Atsecond,therestsubjectsofpublishershouldwidertakemistakingdeducing(inferring)liability,becauseofthedutyforinformationinvestigatingandtrulyensuring.Theycanhavedissolutionofliabilityonlybeprovednothavemistake.Thecausalityisthepremiseandfoundationoftheliabilityprincipled,theliabilityprinciples,theliabilityprinciplesofowncallforvictimsmustprovethecausalitybetweenthefalsestatementactionsanddamages.Fortheparticularityofsecuritymarket,itisverydifficulttoprovethedirectcausality.Inordertosafeguardtheinvestors’benefit,andmakethemnotundertaketooheavyliabilityofputtingtotheproof,thecausalityisdeduced(infered)bythelaw,notadaptedtothetortlawofgeneralprinciple.Meanwhile,itgivestherightofdissolutionofliabilitycounterpleatothefalsestatementperson.Itisanotherkeyproblemofundertakingcivilliabilitythathowtodefinetheextentofcompensationamountofmoneyandquantity.Theextentofcompensationbyfalsestatementpersonistherealdamageofinvestors,notcontainthebenefitwhichcanbeacquired.Thecalculationofrealdamageisthepricedifferencebetweenbuyingpricecorsellingpriceby8receiving,ofinvestorsandthestandardpriceafterrevealingofthefalsestatement.ChapterVisthemainpartofthisthesis.ThisUnitmainlydiscussesthedifferentformsofcivilliabilityandtheiremergencefoundations,naturesandapplicationconditions.Thepublisherandtheinvestorconstitutecontractrelationsintheprimarymarket.So,whenmeetinginvalidcontractofbuyingbecauseoffalsestatements,thepublishershouldtaketheliabilityforfaultthatisallowedbysecuritylawincludingthe18thand175thrules.Theissuerhavenodirectrelationswiththeinvestorinthesecondarymarket.Asaresult,theyshouldtaketheliabilityfortortforinvestoriftheirfalsestatementsdidharmtoinvestor’sknowingrightandpropertyright.Moreover,thepublishermusttaketherealpledgedutyofinformationandsponsorliabilityforothersubjectswhentheinvestorisdamagedintheresultofpublisher’sfalsereports.Lawalsoallowsthisliability.Combiningwithactualfaultincurrentsecuritylegislationofchina,theauthortakescomparativeresearchonabovethreeresponsibilityforms.OnthebasisofcurrentsecuritylegislationandtheNotesofthehighestcourt,theauthorstudiesrealitymechanismofcontentiousactionoffalsestatementciv